How low would you go on clarity?

[carrotguy]

I'm looking at a 2.0 to 3.0 ct chunky cushion cut diamonds... all within the H to K color range.
(although leaning towards H-I color)

In terms of clarity, I've seen some VS1, VS2, SI1, SI2... and really to my novice eye can't really
see anything in that they have been "eye clean". Most of the markings are not on the table itself.

Would you guys recommend going as low as SI1 or SI2?
Would you prefer say a 2.5ct VS2 vs a 3.0ct SI2?

thanks .

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

For me it would really have to be on a case by case basis. I would need to see that 3ct SI2. If it was eye clean to my liking, heck yea I would take it over the 2.5ct. I don't have any "mind clean" issues.

 

[kenny]

With colorless diamonds I'm a high clarity snob and don't mind paying for a VVS1 that is much smaller than a VS or SI1 for the same budget.
I even have one iddy biddy AGS 0 D IF round.

But in Fancy Colored Diamonds the supply is so small and the color itself is so much more important than the clarity that I've bought an I1 because of its rare color.

So it just depends.
You have to find your own comfort zone for clarity and budget and availability of the other specs that are important to you.

 

[ame]

I would rather have a clean VS2 than an SI even if it was "smaller"

 

[yssie]

Responders at all ends of the spectrum It really is up to what you personally want.


I am like Asscherhalo in this regard, if it's eyeclean to my specifications (and there are are no transparency issues) it's sufficiently mind-clean for me! Hence the reason that I own and adore a 2.7 SI2 that's actually not eyeclean, but the main inclusion fits perfectly under a prong, and it doesn't bother me if I don't see it.

 

[butterflyblue]

I guess it would depend on the diamond shape. If its an emerald cut, or asscher then I would want it to be almost perfect for obvious reasons. A round, or princess, cushion etc I would go to an SI1 lowest.

 

[nfowife]

I agree with the pp. So long as I can't see the inclusions, whether they be not there, not visible, or hidden under a prong, that is a-okay with me. I have a 2.27 I/SI2 that is eye clean and I am perfectly satisfied with it. If it's eye clean there's no difference from an SI2 to a VVS1 in terms of the naked eye view. Under a loupe, obviously a different story.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I would rather have a clean VS2 than an SI even if it was "smaller"

Same here. I prefer VS and above.

 

[rubybeth]

It's really going to depend on what is "mind clean" for you. Some want the highest clarity for cultural reasons. Others don't mind an inclusion they can spot with a 10x loupe or looking at it from the side, so that they can always identify 'their' diamond. I have pretty terrible vision and am by no means a perfectionist, so I would be okay with an I1 diamond as long as the inclusion is hard for most people to spot. I know there was a regular poster a few years ago who had a 2 carat I1 and the inclusion fit under a prong, just like Yssie's SI2. I remember thinking, "That's so smart! A bigger diamond for less money and a hidden inclusion!"

For example, this is an I1 AVC from Good Old Gold, and I can't even see the inclusion (it appears to be white) unless I look at the ASET or microscope image:

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8540/

I would be totally cool with that stone, since I know the light performance would be amazing and probably blind people, thus making it impossible for anyone to spot the inclusion.

 

[Rockdiamond]

When buying for my wife, I actually prefer SI2 or even eye clean I1 stones.
Saves a lot of money.......and eye clean Si2 and I1 stones do exist.

 

[ame]

I had an SI2 prior to the rings being stolen, that was a prongable one. But finding another like that proved "impossible" for me with this cut.

 

[Tuckins1]

Honestly, if the inclusion was able to be covered by a prong or part of the setting, and the cut was fantastic, then I wouldn't care about the clarity. That is, of course, unless the inclusion was compromising the integrity of the stone itself...

 

[Amys Bling]

Like asscherhalo and Yssie as long as the stone is eyeclean I would go as low as an SI2 (which my stone is)

 

[Laila619]

I would be happy with an SI2 if it were eye clean and the inclusions didn't pose any durability issues.

 

[carrotguy]

thanks all,
by the way, how do you know if an SI2 diamond has durability concerns/issues?

 

[yssie]

thanks all,
by the way, how do you know if an SI2 diamond has durability concerns/issues?

1. If you are comfortable with your vendor's word, have them check the stone over. A reputably graded (GIA/AGS in the US) SI2 does not in any way automatically merit a 'potential durability issues' warning, but it doesn't hurt to check. Eyeclean to your specifications and brilliance issues if grade-making clouds, wisps, etc. should also be investigated prior to purchase.

2. If you want additional confirmation/are not entirely comfortable with just your vendor's word, You can get an independent appraisal of the loose stone done (www.appraisers.org www.najaappraisers.com www.ags.org). Your appraiser can tell you about any potential issues, make suggestions on how to best set the stone (orientation, setting style) if he/she finds warning signs... You'll want to plan on an independent appraisal of the completed piece as well, to confirm workmanship is as expected, no issues w/ materials/finish/stone.

3. Get sufficient insurance on your finished piece, and then if there's trouble it becomes someone else's problem

 

[marcy]

I would take an eye clean Si1 but prefer VS2 or higher stone. DH won't let me buy the Si stones though because he thinks I'll "see" something in sunlight and then want to change the diamond. I am more picky for my ering than anything else though.

 

[centralsquare]

Depends on the piece. For engagement ring, I would want it to be as mind clean as possible, so prefer VS but would maybe do SI if it is eye clean. For anything else, I would go as low as eye clean and, I'd even go for stones that aren't as long as you can't see face up or can fit under a prong (assuming it doesn't hinder performance)

 

[pregcurious]

I would also take an eye clean SI1. If I can't the inclusions, I'd rather spent the money on something on another aspect that I can see.

 

[Gypsy]

Eyeclean SI with safe inclusions would be fine for me for a brilliant cut diamond. I'd prefer a VS2 or better in a step cut though.

For something like earrings or a pendant an eyeclean I clarity would be fine even.

 

[jstarfireb]

I may be in the minority, but for a special piece like an engagement ring, I would take a smaller VS2 over a larger SI1. Clarity matters more than size to me. I'm OK with SI1s for other pieces, but I was all about VS2 or higher for my engagement ring.

 

[Phoenix]

Another vote for a 2.5ct H VS2 for ering.